Bioglass 45S5, a relevant alternative to autogenous harvesting for secondary alveolar bone grafts in clefts? Retrospective study of one hundred surgeries.

The secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) step restores the continuity of the alveolar bone necessary for dentition. Faced with the complications of autografts, synthetic biomaterials such as Bioglass (BG) 45S5 have been proposed. The objective was to evaluate the success rate of SABG with the addition of BG 45S5 and to highlight the prognostic factors. Patients who underwent operation between 2015 and 2021 and had follow-up cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) were analyzed. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine factors influencing radiographic success. A total of 102 SABG were analyzed. They were unilateral total cleft lip and palate (49, 48.0%). The mean age at surgery was 9.32 ± 3.09 years. Surgeries were performed mainly outside a syndromic context and without a family history after orthodontic preparation. The radiographic success rate at 1 year was 80.4%. Mixed dentition stage (odds ratio [OR] = 7.3, p = 0.024), absence of syndromic context (OR = 20.7, p = 0.024) and female sex (OR = 4.88, p = 0.021) were factors predictive of surgical success. The use of BG 45S5 instead of autograft is relevant for SABG, with a 1-year success rate of over 80%. The stage of mixed dentition, the absence of syndromic context, and female sex were factors for good prognosis.

Knowledge, attitudes and professional practices of ortho-periodontal care of adults: a cross-sectional survey in France.

BACKGROUND: Due to increasing numbers of adult patients, orthodontists are being confronted more and more with periodontal problems. Coordination amongst orthodontists, periodontists and general dentists is useful in preventing and stopping periodontal disease. The main objectives of this survey were to evaluate the technical knowledge, techniques and attitudes employed by French orthodontists, periodontists and general dentists in adult dental care. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to French dentists. The questionnaire, consisting of 30 questions, was divided into six sections covering treatment programs and the forensic environment. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred twenty-two complete answers were recorded. Adults undergoing orthodontic treatment represented 19.9% of the orthodontists' patients, but only 2.67% of the general dentists' patients. Communication between clinicians was rated as good, greater than 3 out of 5. Before treatment, orthodontists were less alarmed than generalists regarding bleeding, recessions, increased probing depths, halitosis and hyperplasia. During treatment, orthodontists never or only occasionally performed palpation or probing in 54.2% and 84.6% of cases. Gingivitis and recessions were the main reasons for consultations for 22.0% and 20.1% of general dentists and periodontists after orthodontic treatment. Of the practitioners surveyed, 43% felt that they experienced a setback in the ortho-periodontal treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed discrepancies in the knowledge and attitudes of practitioners. Therapeutic management remains one of the major challenges of multidisciplinary treatments. Continuing education needs to be further developed in this field.